Of course they reserve that right. They reserve the right to ban anyone, period - just like any other online service. You could say "EA reserves the right to ban testers for not playing their game" and you'd be correct. This is not news.

Anyone remember what happened with EA and Dragon Age 2? Where people who were slamming Bioware and EA over the scandals or severe problems, a lot of people were banned from Biowares website which from that, their game-key became obsolete.

It caused a huge fucking uproar that someone was banned for 'arguing'. They had after a few days quickly reverted it and said it was an 'Accident' or mistake that the 'system' banned the person coincidentally or something...

They have the right to ban people within good reasons and within their terms of service.....but I can smell the negativity and fires that can spawn from this....

Do they really? Wow, I didn't know that. So the developers of The WarZ. who are banning random players who have apparently used hacks, and later agreed that it was a mistake, but didn't; THAT is legal?

This is a first. EA is making an attempt at bug free game environment.

I do not care if they ban testers for not finding bugs. Wait a minute I just realized something.....

You guys actually read the EULA? OMG Facepalm. EVERY game that is tested states something similar in the EULA.......................... ...........This really shouldn't be a topic. I would hide shame if I were the one posting this like they didn't already know.

You get things taken away for not playing by the rules. If your a tester you signed up to play, test, and report bugs you find so they can improve the product. Just like if you mod or cheat and get banned, you broke the terms of service and deserve to be banned.

It's not EA's fault for enforcing the rules unlike anyone else who would put a "beta" when people just treat it like a demo and do nothing to try and improve the problems with the game.

Does EA have saintly business practises, of course not, no business does.....just look at Activision and how horrid they are (way worse then EA) but they make money which is the game they are playing (unfortunately).

I don't agree with any of that. Sure they can enforce their rules on players, but to ban a person from, say, Dead Space 3 (which they paid full price for) because they failed to report a bug and mentioned to do somebody? Completely stupid.

I do agree that it is extreme to apply it to every game but to be fair, nobody is forcing anybody to participate in a beta. This is why they give you the option at some point during the process to sign all their terms which you have the option to read and disagree to (even if that means forfeiting your spot in a beta).

But yes, this is mildly extreme but I wouldn't be surprised if most companies do this but it isn't caught because of the lack of reading of the terms by the majority. EA being the corporation it is (like Activision) will always be under a higher scrutiny than some smaller company that cannot afford to ban someone from every game for not following the rules.

By any means though, and this applies to everyone, if you don't like the rules, then don't participate in their beta or if you REALLY don't like them, don't buy EA, it really is that simple.

also there is a fine line between banning someone for not playing by the rules and banning someone because he has said or done something you don't like which can be classed as Corporate censorship and is illegal. for example sega has been removing videos and putting strikes on peoples channels for copyright infringement even on videos that have no gameplay footage and is just someone talking about a game sega made/published. another example for this is the whole WarZ nonsense where people have been banned from forums for saying anything negative about the game. i know both of those cases are very different than banning a tester for not reporting bugs but my point is that you can't just ban anyone and anything as you please. besides i think the title is a bit misleading i think the point EA wants to get across is that people finding and exploiting bugs in the testing period to use to their advantage when the game is released should and will be banned. personally i think EA should test the game them selves rather than ban people because they found out about a bug they couldn't be bothered to fix in the development process. all in all this is lame news and the kind of stuff that shouldn't make it onto this website i'd like to do something about that but last time i tried i got a restriction from N4G. talk about banning eh...

I personally don't like EA business practises at all. However in this case, they are right. Many companies include in their ToS when you agree to beta test them that you are "obligated" to report bugs. Even in MMOs if you find a bug and do not report it, but instead use it for whanever advantage or fun, it can be bannable.

I did beta testing for EA last year, in their Guildford HQ for just two seasons and alongside with the NDA, they gave us a ToS that said we have to report bugs. It would be a breach of contract if we did otherwise.

Think of it as a Doctor in a hospital. He does general check ups, find something small to someone and doesn't report it. It would be a breach of contract as he is paid to do something and he doesn't. In this case it may be unpaid work, but still same principles apply....

I can list lots of examples from software development, including the company I currently work for.

It is extreme, unlikely to happen, but for legal reasons they should write it down.

I did read the article. If you violate their terms of service they reserve the right to ban you from their servers, which obviously affects any other online play with games they've published. It's within their rights to do this, and is certainly not arbitrary. I suggest you do some more reading on the subject so you can realize how out of line you are. If you don't want to jeopardize your online standing, either don't join the beta or play it as it's meant to be played. If you don't agree with their business practices, don't buy their games.

Except EA solely determines what is "right". Weather or not someone activity cheated or exploited a bug or benefited from the effects and wound up on a suspect list by mistake, EA gets to do whatever it wants.

They can say you have to pay to be on their servers in addition to any other fees and as far as they're concerned they'd be well within their "rights" regardless if such was beyond common sense or business practice.

someone can easily not notice a bug and thus not have to report it i do not think that is the point. the only way to prove someone is not reporting bugs is if they start bragging about it in game or in forums. we have all seem these crazy internet people, just the admins way of dealing with some annoying 30 year old (acting like a 12 year old) living with his mom. or maybe they are just trying to increase the amount of feedback they get? :D

I was thinking the same thing, some people can find bugs/exploits within seconds and someone else can play for hours and don't notice anything. I've played some games that were labeled "bug-ridden" and found nothing; and played some good games and noticed off the bat something wasn't right.

I don't like the idea that they hold final say-so about someone playing an EA game online if someone doesn't report something they didn't find. I can understand intentional exploitation but to ban someone from not finding anything is a bit extreme.

I think if you find a bug in a beta, and all you do is exploit it, you deserve a ban anyway. Hackers and cheaters are lame enough in full release games, but exploiting bugs as a tester? You're a sad individual.

Not that I agree with any sort of banning like this, but I think what does get devs is people are in beta tests to help fix any problems and write improvements. 90% of people in Beta tests don't do that :/